The Social Foundations of Latin America’s Recurrent Populism: Problems of Popular Sector Class Formation and Collective Action (original) (raw)

The resurgence of populism in Latin America

Bulletin of Latin American Research, 2000

Contemporary manifestations of`neopopulisma are situated in an analysis of the role of political institutions in capitalist societies, and the idea of structural and institutional crisis. It is argued that`populista and`neopopulista discourse alike must be understood in terms of their relationship to speci"c conjunctural projects for the reorientation of capitalist reproduction. This approach directs attention back to the contrasting conjunctures in which classical populist and contemporary neopopulist political projects were launched. It also provides a basis on which contemporary projects which adopt elements of populist strategy and discourse can be compared and evaluated. : S 0 2 6 1 -3 0 5 0 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 7 6 -5

Latin American Politics: The Foundations of the Populist Turn

The Middle Atlantic Review of Latin American Studies , 2023

This article explores the normative foundations of the contemporary populist turn in Latin America from a theoretical perspective. We argue that the ongoing structural crisis of representative democracy, defined by its inability to identify and respond to growing social demands to provide valuable results for the majority of the population, negatively affects its legitimacy. This facilitates the irruption of a more radical political project, which, in the case of Latin America, is based on a populist discourse. The discussion focuses on the theoretical determination of the arguments used by populism to justify political action.

Critical Debates Populism in Latin America: Past, Present, and Future

Populism in Latin America: Past, Present and Future, 2019

Although populism has been growing in prominence in intellectual circles, the phenomenon is not new. Some academics assert that populism began with the People’s Party in the United States, the narodniki movement in Russia, or Boulangism in France (Judis 2016; Rovira Kaltwasser et al. 2017). Others trace its roots to Peronism in Argentina (Germani [1978] 2003; Finchelstein 2017) and populist mobilization in Peru (Jansen 2017). Although in Europe and the United States populism is normally viewed as a recent phenomenon associated with the radical right and postmaterialism (Inglehart and Norris 2017; Mudde 2014), in Latin America, populism has had a long, varied history. Literature on the subject has identified three populist waves in the region: classic populism (1930‒1950), characterized by a strong, charismatic leader and working-class mobilization (Di Tella 1965; Germani [1978] 2003); neopopulism in the 1990s, which saw a paradoxical alliance between populism and neoliberalism (Weyland 1996, 2001); and early twenty-first-century populism, linked with the appearance of a radical left (Collins 2014; Ellner 2003). As this brief survey suggests, analyzing Latin American populism is a complex task. Given the quantity and variety of populisms Latin America has experienced over its history (de la Torre 2017), studying the contemporary intellectual debate surrounding populism is particularly important. Therefore, this essay takes up the study of populism in Latin America, divided in three parts. First, it describes the principal theoretical approaches to populism; namely, the structural, discursive, political-strategic, ideational, and sociocultural approaches. Second, it briefly examines four recent books on populism in Latin America, written by a political scientist (Barr), a communications scholar (Block), a historian (Finchelstein), and a sociologist (Jansen). Third, it proposes some considerations for future research based on the four works reviewed and our own ideas, drawn from recent trends in the international literature on populism.

Populism/people/popular: Reflections from a Latin American perspective

Organization, 2019

The motives for writing this essay are twofold. First, there is a risk that the stigma currently associated with populism may contaminate the notions of people and popular struggles that are so relevant in the Latin American political and organizational context. Thus, this essay contributes towards overcoming the predominant discussion on populism from the perspective of the Global North West. The second motive arises from the understanding that the organizational processes within popular movements and struggles cannot be comprehensively studied without fully appreciating the knowledge theoretically elaborated in, and that emerges from below, which most often remains restricted to the practices and spaces of struggle. Dussel’s philosophy and ethics of liberation can contribute to a renewal of the way we study and theorize organization to include the radical potentiality of developing anti-management studies in the engagement with popular struggles, such as those organized against th...

Populism in Latin America: Old and new populisms in Argentina and Brazil

There has been a renewed interest in populism in Latin America, sparked by the social mobilization against neoliberalism usually referred to as the 'Pink Tide'. Governments brought to power by the Pink Tide have been successful in reconstructing the conditions of capital accumulation as well as incorporating a new set of social movement demands. This article puts forward an interpretation of 'Pink Tide neopopulism' based on a political economy approach. It argues that the two factors of a crisis of neoliberalism in the region and the existence of social movements with unmet demands are not enough to explain the rise and demise of populism. The commodity boom needs to be added as an enabling condition for these transformations. By revisiting the debate in Latin America and proposing a different reading, the article redefines an overloaded term and provides a new analytical viewpoint from which to understand the 'historical task' of populism in Brazil and Argentina.

Populism and the second crisis of incorporation in Latin America

Beginning with the election of Hugo Chávez in 1998, populist leaders have come to power in many Latin American countries. I argue that this recent wave of populism results from demands for incorporation made by marginalized, unorganized groups. Their demands are a reflection of acute inequality and, when aggregated, lead to crisis. Populist movements, parties, and leaders tend to emerge during such crises because they are able to take advantage of the presence of groups that become de-incorporated or that were never incorporated and mobilize them within existing state structures. This is a distinctive pattern in highly unequal societies where a full set of rights and freedoms has not been universalized. I illustrate the usefulness of my approach by applying it to the rise of Chávez in Venezuela. I conclude that, where populism enables meaningful incorporation of marginalized groups, it may ultimately provide an improved basis for long-term democracy in Latin America.

The Resurgence of Radical Populism in Latin America

Constellations, 2007

A specter is haunting Latin America: radical populism. Former presidents such as Fernando Henrique Cardoso and respectable media analysts have cautioned us about the dangers of charismatic and plebiscitary domination for democracy. They have warned us of the risks of irresponsible economic policies. A holy alliance is trying to exorcize the ghost of populism that periodically reappears even though its death has been constantly announced and predicted. 1 In contrast to the apocalyptic warnings of the media analysts and politicians we have an accumulated knowledge of populism that can help us arrive to more nuanced conclusions about its relationships to democracy. Over the last three decades we have seen a renaissance of studies. If previous scholarship based on modernization and dependency theories tied populism to specific economic and social forces, 2 this new wave of research has uncoupled politics from what were understood as deeper structural determinants. Scholars have shown that populism is not necessarily linked to the transition to modernity or to import-substitution industrialization. The unexpected affinities between populism and neoliberalism stimulated research on the politics of structural adjustment under neo-populist leadership. 3 More recently, the nationalist and anti-imperialist rhetoric of Presidents Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Rafael Correa of Ecuador have provoked passionate debates on whether or not we are experiencing a rebirth of radical-national populism. 4 Unsurprisingly, scholars have tended to reproduce the cleavages produced by populist leaders. What for some are authentic forms of expression of the popular will by leaders who empowered those previously disenfranchised, for others are forms of charismatic, authoritarian, and messianic domination. Behind the smoke screen provoked by the praise for national populism or its condemnation we can identify important debates over the meanings and interpretations of democracy. Instead of arguing that populism is the negation or the essence of democracy this article draws on current experiences to explore the uneasy and ambiguous relations between populism and liberal democracy. Populism has been an important democratizing force that has mobilized those previously excluded. It has incorporated common people into the political community. However, the distinctiveness of these processes of inclusion and democratization needs to be specified. What are the forms of political participation and representation privileged by populism? How is democracy understood by the friends and foes of populism? What are the effects of populist rhetoric for the democratization of society? Why do common folk continue to support populist leaders?

Seeing and Not Seeing Populism in Latin America (A Contra Corriente, Fall 2019)

A Contra Corriente, 2019

To understand the current global surge of populist governments, scholars and commentators have pointed to the harms of neoliberalism, the breakdown of democratic norms (Levitsky and Ziblatt 2018), the characteristics of populism and how they differ from fascism (Finchelstein 2017)), and the affects and experiences that drive support for nationalist leaders (Mazzarrella 2019). I suggest a different, if complementary approach to understanding populism by turning to the specificity and complexity of Latin American politics in the 20 th and 21 st century histories. First, I view populism in the context of Latin American nations'